





REMARKS 



IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 



JANUARY 31, i8ss, 



VINDICATING THE LATE JAMES A. BAYARD, 



OF DEIjAWARJE, 



AND REFUTING THE GROUNDLESS CHARGES CONTAINED IN 
THE "ANAS" OF THOMAS JEFFERSON, 



ASPERSING HIS CHARACTER. 




Book. 




REMARKS 



IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 



JANUARY 31, 1855, 



VINDICATING THE LATE JAMES A. BAYARD, 



OF DELAWARE. 



AND REFUTING THE GROUNDLESS CHARGES CONTAINED IN 
THE "ANAS" OF THOMAS JEFFERSON, 



ASPERSING HIS CHARACTER. 



£.^0 



\i.z\ 



am 



jAovv . A . ir. x^OuLtCxrucL 



25 J I '07 



By reason of the fact that the statements contained in the 
entry in Jefferson's Diary of February 12, 1801, concerning 
my great-grandfather, James A. Bayard, have recently been 
republished in a newspaper in this City^ I deem it proper at this 
time, to make publication of the accompanying pamphlet, in 
order that the charges in the Diary above referred to, may again 
be shown to be false. 

THOMAS F. BAYARD. 

Wilmington, Delaware. 
May 25, 1907. 



VINDICATION. 



Mr. BAYARD said : Mr. President, since I have been a 
member of the Senate, under no circumstances have I had 
occasion to ask the indulgence of the body for the purpose of 
remarks upon any subject having a personal relation to myself ; 
but I feel authorized to ask that indulgence now, both from my 
position as a Senator from the State of Delaware, and a sense 
of duty to the memory of a parent who has left no undis- 
tinguished name in his country's annals. 

My purpose is, by a succinct statement of facts, and the 
submission of documents sustaining that statement, to repel 
and refute two utterly groundless aspersions upon the memory 
of my father, (the late James A. Bayard, of Delaware,) con- 
tained in the "Anas" of Thomas Jefferson, as published under 
the authority of Congress. A copy of the works of Mr. Jefferson 
was delivered to me, as a member of the Senate, at the com- 
mencement of the present session ; and, in running over them, 
I found that two charges, reflecting upon the character of my 
father, which were published in the first edition of Mr. Jeffer- 
son's works, were retained in the edition published by the au- 
thority of Congress. In a note, at page 87, of the ninth volume, 
the editor assigns the reasons why he "did not feel at liberty" 
to exclude, what he denominates "the celebrated Anas" from 
the publication. I mean to imply no censure upon him for 
retaining them, though I might have arrived at a different 
conclusion ; and I doubt not that he exercised an honest dis- 



cretion. But the very fact that, in this publication made under 
the authority of Congress the two charges to which I allude, 
though previously refuted, have been retained without the 
slightest notice of that refutation, renders it more appropriate 
— indeed, imperative — that I should thus publicly repel any 
statement contained in that publication aspersing the character 
of one of the most distinguished citizens of my State, and of 
a father around whose memory my best affections are clustered ; 
whose stainless character affords some consolation to his children 
for his early death. 

Mr. President, when the first publication of the works of 
Mr. Jefferson was made, in 1830, my friend and colleague, 
who had just entered the Senate of the United States, having 
his attention attracted to one of the misrepresentations con- 
tained in these "Anas," with a promptitude and sincerity, and 
depth of feeling, which I can never forget, called the attention 
to the passage of two Senators (then most fortunately members 
of this body) on whose alleged authority this misrepresentation 
is founded, and it was then, by their testimony, publicly refuted. 

The second misrepresentation, however, escaped his notice, 
but the publication of what had occurred in the Senate, brought 
the writings of Mr. Jefferson, for the first time, within the 
knowledge of my brother, Richard H. Bayard, (one of my 
predecessors in this body) and myself. 

We found the second misrepresentation in another part 
of the "Anas," and, subsequently, after months of inquiries, 
were enabled to obtain documentary testimony utterly demol- 
ishing both these aspersions upon our father's memory. 

We published this testimony in December, 1830, in a 
newspaper in Philadelphia, and also, in pamphlets; but such a 
mode of refutation being of a perishable nature, and the works 
of Mr. Jefferson having been republished under the authority 
of Congress, it is requisite that the refutation should be made 
in a more public and more enduring form. 



The first charge will be found in the ninth volume of the 
congressional edition of Mr. Jefferson's works, page 202. 
It is in these words : 

''February 12, 1801. — Edward Livingston tells me that Bayard applied to-day, 
or last night, to General Samuel Smith, and represented to him the expediency of 
his coming over to the States who vote for Burr; that there was nothing in the way of 
appointment which he might not command, and particularly mentioned the Secretary- 
ship of the Navy. Smith asked him if he was authorized to make the offer. He 
said he was authorized. Smith told this to Livingston and to W. C. Nicholas, who 
confirms it to me." 

In answer to this charge, I shall first read the remarks in 
the Senate at the time my colleague brought it to the notice of 
Messrs. Smith and Livingston ; then the deposition of my father 
made in 1805, in a suit for libel brought by Aaron Burr, 
against James Cheetham, and a letter written by him to General 
Hamilton, on the 7th of January, 1801. I shall also refer to 
a letter from Colonel Burr to General Smith, a copy of which 
is given in the deposition of General Smith in the case of 
James Gillespie against Abraham Smith, which deposition I 
shall read hereafter in refutation of the second charge made by 
Mr. Jefferson. 

REMARKS IN THE SENATE. 

<'The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution moved by Mr, Foot 
respecting surveys of the public lands. 

" Mr. Benton being entitled to the floor — 

" Mr. Clayton said, that he desired the permission of the Senator from Missouri, 
[Mr. Benton,] who was entitled to the floor, to call the attention of two of the 
honorable members of this body, Mr. Smith, of Maryland, and Mr. Livingston, of 
Louisiana, to a passage in a book which had been cited in this debate by the Senator 
from South Carolina, [Mr. Hayne,] as authority on another subject. He did 
not rise for the purpose of discussing the resolution itself. In the wide range 
of the debate here, the northeastern and southern sections of the country had been 
arrayed against each other. He listened to the discussion without any intention of 
participating in it, while the State which he had the honor in part to represent, 
had escaped unscathed by the controversy. Though favorable to the resolution, as 
a mere proposition to inquire, he felt but little interest in such contentions between the 
North and South; and his only desire in relation to that subject, was, that the warmth 



of the discussion might have no tendency to alienate one portion of the country from 
the other. But his attention had been called by a number of members of this House 
to a passage m the same book, another part of which had been referred to by the 
Senator from South Carolina. That passage charged an illustrious statesman, who 
formerly occupied the seat of a Senator here, and whose memory and fame were dear 
to himself and to the people he represented, with atrocious corruption, of which he 
was convinced that great and good man could never have been guilty; and as the wit- 
nesses referred to in the book itself were present, and ready to give testimony to set 
the charge at rest, he hoped he should be pardoned for referring to the ob/ectional 
passage in their presence. 

- He then read, from the fourth volume of Jefferson's Memoirs, page ;ic; (the 
same volume which had been brought into the Senate by General Hayne,) the follow- 
ing passage : ' 

" ^February the ,2th, i8oi.-Edward Livingston tells me that Bayard applied 
to-day, or last night, to General Samuel Smith, and represented to him the expediency 
of coming over to the States who vote for Burr; that there was nothing in the way of 
appointment which he might not command, and particularly mentioned the Secretary- 
ship of the Navy. Smith asked him if he was authorized to make the offer. He .aid he 
was authorized. Smith told this to Livingston, and to W. C. Nicholas, who confirms 
It to me, &c. 

"He then called upon the Senators from Maryland and Louisiana, referred to 
in this passage, to disprove the statement here made. 

" Mr. Smith, of Maryland, rose and said, that he had read the paragraph before 
he came here to-day, and was, therefore, aware of its import. He had not the most 
distant recollection that Mr. Bayard had ever made such a proposition to him. 
Mr. Bayard, said he, and myself, though politically opposed, were intimate personal 
friends, and he was an honorable man. Of all men Mr. Bayard would have been the 
last to make such a proposition to any man ; and I am confident that he had too much 
respect for me, to have made it, under any circumstances. I never received from any 
man any such proposition. ^ 

" Mr Livingston, of Louisiana, said that, as to the precise question which had 
been put to him by the Senator from Delaware, he must say, that having taxed his 
recollection, as far as it could be on so remote a transaction, he had no remembrance 



DEPOSITION OF J. A. BAYARD. 

The deposition of James A. Bayard, sworn and examined on the twenty day of 

- , in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and five, at Wil- 
mington, in the State of Delaware, by virtue of a commission issuing out of the 
supreme court of judicature in the State of New York, to John Vaughan, directed 
for the examination of the said James A. Bayard, in a cause there depending be- 



1st. To the first interrogatory this deponent answers and says: As a member of 
the House of Representatives I paid a visit of ceremony to the plaintiff on the 4th of 
March, in the year one thousand eight hundred and one, and was introduced to him. I 
had no acquaintance with him before that period. I had no knowledge of the defen- 
dant but what was derived from his general reputation before the last session of 
Congress, when a personal acquaintance commenced upon my becoming a member of 
the Senate. 

2d. To the second interrogatory this deponent saith : I was. 

3d. To the third interrogatory this deponent saith : There was an equality of 
electoral votes for Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Burr, and the choice of one of them did, of 
consequence, devolve on the House of Representatives. 

4th. To the fourth interrogatory this deponent saith : The House, resolved into 
States, balloted for a President a number of times — the exact number is not at present 
in my recollection — before a choice was made. The frequency of balloting was 
occasioned by the preference given by the Federal side of the House to Mr. Burr. 
With the exception of Mr. Huger, of South Carolina, I recollect no Federal member, 
who did not concur in the general course of balloting for Mr. Burr. I cannot name 
each member. The Federal members, at that time, composed a majority of the House, 
though not of the States. Their names can he ascertained by the Journals of the 
House of Representatives. 

5th. To the fifth interrogatory this deponent saith : I know of no measures but 
those of argument and persuasion which were used to secure the election of Mr. Burr 
to the Presidency. Several gentlemen of the Federal party doubted the practicability 
of electing Mr. Burr, and the policy of attempting it. Before the election came on, 
there were several meetings of the party to consider the subject. It was frequently de- 
bated ; and most of the gentlemen who had adopted a decided opinion in favor of his 
election, employed their influence and address to convince those who doubted, of the 
propriety of the measure. I cannot tell whether Mr. Burr was acquainted with what 
passed at our meetings. But I neither knew nor heard of any letter being written to 
him on the subject. He never informed me, nor have I reason to believe, further than 
inference from the open professions, and public course pursued by the Federal party> 
that he was apprised that an attempt would be made to secure his election. 

6th. To the sixth interrogatory the deponent saith: Mr. Burr, or any person on 
his behalf, never did communicate to me, in writing or otherwise, nor to any other 
persons of which I have any knowledge, that any measures had been suggested, or 
would be pursued, to secure his election. Preceding the day of the election, in the 
course of the session, the Federal members of Congress had a number of general 
meetings, the professed and sole purpose of which was to consider the propriety of 
giving their support to the election of Mr. Burr. The general sentiment of the party 
was strongly in his favor. Mr. Huger, I think, could not be brought to vote for him. 
Mr. Craik and Mr. Baer, of Maryland, and myself, were those who acquiesced with 
the greatest difficulty and hesitation. I did not believe Mr. Burr could be elected, and 
thought it vain to make the attempt. But I was chiefly influenced by the current of 
public sentiment, which I thought it neither safe nor politic to counteract. It was, 



however, determined by the party without consulting Mr. Burr, to make the experiment, 
whether he could be elected. Mr. Ogden never was authorized nor requested by me, 
nor any member of the House, to my knowledge, to call upon Mr. Burr, and to make 
any propositions to him of any kind or nature. I remember Mr. Ogden' s being at 
Washington, while the election was depending. I spent one or two evenings in his 
company at Stiller' s hotel, in small parties, and we recalled an acquaintance of very 
early life, which had been suspended by a separation of eighteen or twenty years. 
I spent not a moment with Mr. Ogden in private. It was reported that he was an 
agent for Mr. Burr, or it was understood that he was in possession of declarations of 
Mr. Burr, that he would serve as President if elected. I never questioned him on the 
subject. Although I considered Mr. Burr personally better qualified to fill the office 
of President than Mr. Jefferson, yet for a reason above suggested, I felt no anxiety 
for his election, and I presumed if Mr. Ogden came on any errand from Mr. Burr, or 
was desirous of making any disclosure relative to his election, he would do it without 
any application from me. But Mr. Ogden or any other person never did make any 
communication to me from Mr. Burr, nor do I remember having any conversation 
with him relative to the election. I never had any communication directly or indirectly 
■with Mr. Burr in relation to his election to the Presidency. I was one of those who 
thought from the beginning that the election of Mr. Burr 7vas not practicable. The 
sentiment 7vas freely and openly expressed. I remember it was generally said by those 
who wished a perseverance in the opposition to Mr. Jefferson, that several Democratic 
States were more disposed to vote for Mr. Burr than for Mr. Jefferson. That out of 
complaisance to the known intention of the party they would vote a decent length of 
time for Mr. Jefferson, and as soon as they could excuse themselves by the imperious 
situation of affairs, would give their votes for Mr. Burr, the man they really preferred. 
The States relied upon for this change were New York, New Jersey, Vermont, and 
Tennessee. I never however, understood that any assurance to this effect came from 
Mr. Burr. Early in the election it was reported that Mr. Edward Livingston, the 
Representative of the city of New York, was the confidential agent of Mr. Burr and 
that Mr. Burr had committed himself entirely to the discretion of Mr. Livingston, 
having agreed to adopt all his acts. I took an occasion to sound Mr. Livingston on 
the subject, and intimated that, having it in my power to terminate the contest, I 
should do so, unless he could give me some assurance that we might calculate upon 
a change in the votes of some of the members of his party. Mr. Livingston stated 
that he felt no great concern as to the event of the election, but he disclaimed any 
agency from Mr. Burr, or any connection with him on the subject, and any 
knowledge of Mr. Burr's designing to cooperate in support of his election. 

7th. The deponent answering that part of the seventh interrogatory, which 
relates to letters received from the late Alexander Hamilton, says : I did receive, in 
the course of the winter of 1801, several letters from General Hamilton upon the 
subject of the election, but the name of David A. Ogden is not mentioned in any of 
them. The general design and effect of these letters was to persuade me to vote for 
Mr. Jefferson, and not for Mr. Burr. The letters contain very strong reasons and a 
very earnest opinion against the election of Mr. Burr. In answer to the residue of 



10 



the same interrogatory, the deponenent saith: I repeat that I know of no means used 
to promote the election of Mr. Burr, but persuasion. I am wholly ignorant of what 
the plaintiff was apprised of in relation to the election, as I had no communication 
with him, directly or indirectly; and as to the expectations of a change of votes from 
Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Burr, I never knew of a better ground for it than the opinions 
and calculations of a number of members. 

8th. In answer to the eighth interrogatory, the deponent saith : I know of 
nothing which, in my opinion, can be of service to the defendant in the cause. 

To the interrogatory on the part of the plaintiff, the deponent answers : Having 
yielded with Messrs. Craik and Baer, of Maryland, to the strong desire of the great 
body of the party with whom we usually acted, and agreed to vote for Mr. Burr, and 
those gentlemen and myself being governed by the same views and motives, we 
pledged ourselves to each other to pursue the same line of conduct, and act together. 
We felt that some concession was due to the judgment of a great majority of our 
political friends, who differed from us in opinion, but we determined that no con- 
sideration should make us lose sight for a moment of the necessity of a President 
being chosen. We therefore resolved that as soon as it was fairly ascertained that 
Mr. Burr could not be elected, to give our votes to Mr. Jefferson. General Morris, 
of Vermont, shortly after acceded to this arrangement. The result of the ballot of the 
States had uniformly been eight States for Mr. Jefferson, six for Mr. Burr, and two 
divided. Mr. Jefferson wanted the vote of one State only ; those three gentlemen 
belonged to the divided States, I held the vote of the State of Delaware ; it was 
therefore in the power of either of us to terminate the election. Those gentlemen 
knowing the strong interest of my State to have a President, and knowing the sin- 
cerity of my determination to make one, left it to me to fix the time when the 
opposition should cease, and to make terms, if any could be accomplished, with the 
friends of Mr. Jefferson. I took pains to disclose this state of things in such a manner, 
that it might be known to the friends of Mr. Burr, and to those gentlemen who were 
believed to be most disposed to change their votes in his favor. I repeatedly stated 
to many gentlemen with whom I was acting, that it was a vain thing to protract the 
election, as it had become manifest that Mr. Burr would not assist us; and, as we 
could do nothing without his aid, I expected, under these circumstances, if there 
were any latent engines at work in Mr. Burr's favor, the plan of operations would 
be disclosed to me. But, although I had the power, and threatened to terminate the 
election, I had not even an intimation from any friend of Mr. Burr's, that it would be 
desirable to them to protract it. I never did discover that Mr. Burr used the least 
influence to promote the object we had in view. And being completely persuaded 
that Mr. Burr would not cooperate with us, I determined to end the contest by 
voting for Mr. Jefferson. I publicly announced the intention which I designed to 
carry into effect the next day. In the morning of the day there was a general 
meeting of the party, where it was generally admitted that Mr. Burr could not be 
elected ; but some thought it was better to persist in our vote, and to go without 
a President rather than to elect Mr. Jefferson. The greater number, however. 



II 



wished the election terminated, and a President made; and, in the course of the 
day, the manner was settled, which was afterwards adopted, to end the business. 

Mr. Burr, probably, might have put an end sooner to the election by coming 
forward and declaring that he would not serve, if chosen ; but I have no reason to 
believe, and never did think, that he interfered, even to the point of personal influence, 
to obstruct the election of Mr. Jefferson, or to promote his own. 



LETTER FROM J. A. BAYARD TO A. HAMILTON. 

Washington, 7/// ya«?<rt; J, 1801. 
Dear Sir : I have been but a few days in this city, but since my arrival have 
had the pleasure to receive the letter which you did me the honor to write on the 
27th ultimo. I am fully sensible of the great importance of the subject to which it 
relates, and am, therefore, extremely obliged by the information you have been so 
good as to communicate. 



It is considered, that, at least in the first instance, Georgia, North Carolina, 
Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, will vote 
for Mr. Jefferson. It is probable that Maryland and Vermont will be divided. It is, 
therefore, counted that, upon the first ballot, it would be possible to give to Mr. Burr 
six votes. It is calculated, however, and strongly insisted by some gentlemen, that 
a persevering opposition to Mr. Jefferson would bring over New York, New Jersey, 
and Maryland. What is the probability relative to New York ? Your means enable 
you to form the most correct opinion. As to New Jersey and Maryland, it would 
depend on Mr. Lynn, of the former, and Mr. Dent, of the latter State. 

I assure you sir, there appears to be a strong inclination in a majority of the 
Federal party to support Mr. Burr. The current has already acquired considerable 
force, and is manifestly increasing. The vote which the representation of a State 
enables me to give, would decide the question in favor of Mr. Jefferson. At present, 
I am by no means decided as to the object of preference. If the Federal party should 
take up Mr. Burr, I ought certainly to be impressed with the most undoubting con- 
viction before I separated myself from them. I cannot, however, deny that there are 
strong considerations which give a preference to Mr. Jefferson. The subject admits 
of many and very doubtful views, and before I resolve on the part I shall take, I 
will await the approach of the crisis which may probably bring with it circumstances 
decisive of the event. 

The Federal party meet on Friday for the purpose of forming a resolution as to 
their line of conduct. I have not the least doubt of their agreeing to support Burr. 

Their deter))iination will not bind me, for though it might cost me a painful 
sti'uggle to disappoint the views and wishes of many gentlemen with whom I have 
been accustomed to act, yet the magnitude of the subject forbids the sacrifice of a strong 
conviction. I cannot answer for the coherence of my letter, as I have undertaken to 



12 



write to you from the Chamber of Representatives with an attention divided by the 
debate which occupies the House. I have not considered myself at liberty to show 
your letter to any one, though I think it would be serviceable, if you could trust my 
discretion in the communication of it. 

I am, with great consideration, your very obedient servant, 

JAMES A. BAYARD. 

Hon. Alexander Hamilton. 

It will be perceived, Mr. President, that the charge which 
Mr. Jefferson has recorded is, in its offensive character, this: 
That my father attempted to corrupt General Samuel Smith, 
of Maryland, by offering to purchase his support of Mr. Burr, 
by the promise of such office as he might desire, designating, 
especially, the Secretaryship of the Navy, and further, that 
my father stated he was authorized to make the offer. It 

must be borne in mind, that General Smith was, at the time 
of the election of 1801, a Representative from Maryland, and 
that the vote of Maryland was equally divided. 

The denial of Mr. Jefferson's own witness. General Smith, 
is broad and unqualified, and Mr. Edward Livingston, who is 
cited as a witness that Smith made a similar statement to him, 
denies all remembrance of it. 

As to the truth or falsity of the charge, Mr. Livingston 
is not alleged to have had any personal knowledge. 

The deposition of my father, in the case of Mr. Burr vs. 
Cheetham, proves that he had not even a personal acquaintance 
with Colonel Burr antecedent to the election of 1801, and no 
communication with him, directly or indirectly. It further 

shows that, from the commencement of the struggle, as to the 
election, my father was opposed- to the determination of his 
party,and only yielded to it for a time, as "a concession which 
was due to the judgment of a great majority of his political 
friends," and that, mainly through his influence, the course 
adopted by the Federal party was abandoned, and the election 
of Mr. Jefferson effected. His letter of January 7th, 1801, 
written in the confidence of friendship to General Hamilton, 



confirms this conclusively. Further, the charge made by Mr. 
Jefferson involves the gross absurdity of an entire stranger 
to Colonel Burr, making an authorized offer of office on his 
behalf, with a view to the corruption of one of his (Burr's) 
intimate friends and correspondents, who had been selected by 
him as his />roxj/, to defeat the very object for which the alleged 
offer was made. This relation of Colonel Burr to Mr. Smith, 
appears in his letter to the latter, of the date of December i6, 
1800, which letter was a matter of notoriety before the alleged 
conversation between my father and General Smith, is stated 
to have occurred, having been published in the newspapers as 
early as December 30, 1800. 

I shall read a copy of it, as contained in General Smith's 
deposition, in my answer to the second charge. 

Sir, I look back with pride and pleasure to the course taken 
by my father in the election of 1801, and the service he rendered 
to his country in being the chief actor in its termination. 

I will not detain the Senate by reading the other testimony, 
in corroboration of that which I have submitted, but I desire 
that it may be appended by the reporter to these remarks. I 
allude to letters from Mr. Baer, of Maryland, Mr. John Chew 
Thomas, of Pennsylvania, Mr. Jarvis, of Vermont, (a friend 
and appointee of Mr. Jefferson,) Joseph L. Sprague, of Mass- 
achusetts, and Judge Paine, of Vermont. 

Surely, sir, my father was entitled to somewhat more justice 
from a President to whose election he was mainly condusive, 
than a permanent record of one of those political calumnies, 
which will always arise during the excitement of party contests, 
and which should be permitted to perish with the excitement 
which gives them birth. 

The second aspersion upon my father's memory more 
offensive, and equally groundless, is in the following words : 

April 15, 1806. — "I did not commit these things to writing at the time, but I do it 
now, because, in a suit between him (Burr) and Cheetham, he has had a deposition 



14 



of Mr. Bayard taken, which seems to have no relation to the suit, nor to any other 
object than to calumniate me. Bayard pretends to have addressed to me during the 
pending of the Presidential election in l8oi, through General Samuel Smith, certain 
conditions on which my election might be obtained, and that General Smith, after 
conversing with me, gave answers from me. This is absolutely false. No proposition 
of any kind was ever made to me on that occasion by General Smith, nor any answer 
authorized by me. And this fact General Smith affirms at this moment." 
— Jeff^'f'^on'' s li'orks, Congressional Edition, page 209. 

I do not read the context which relates to an interview 
between Colonel Burr and Mr. Jefferson, some time in March, 
1806 — it having no relation to my father; but confine my 
quotation to that part which embodies the charge affecting his 
character. 

The calumny involved in this charge is, that my father, in 
a deposition made by him under oath, falsely pretended that he 
had addressed to Mr. Jefferson, through General Samuel Smith, 
pending the election of 1801, certain inquiries in the nature 
of conditions to which an affirmative answer had been received 
by him from General Smith. 

My evidence in reply to this charge is conclusive. I now 
read the deposition of my father, made in the case of Gillespie 
vs. Smith on the 3d of April, 1806, and that of General Smith, 
made in the same case on the 15th of the same month. I read 
also, the fifth interrogatory, omitting the others, as the depo- 
sitions are perfectly intelligible without them : 

FIFTH INTERROGATORY. 
Fifth. — Do you or do you not know, or have you heard so that you believe, of any 
negotiations, bargains, or agreements in the year 1800 or 1801, after the said equality 
became known, and before the choice of the President, by or on behalf of any person, 
and whom, with the parties called Federal or Republican, or with either of them, or 
with any individual or individuals, and whom, of either of the said parties, relative 
to the office of President of the United States ? If yea, declare the particulars thereof, 
and the reasons of such your belief. 



DEPOSITION OF J. A. BAYARD. 
Deposition of the honorable James A. Bayard, a witness produced, sworn, and 
examined in a cause depending in the supreme court of the State of New York, 
between James Gillespie, plaintiff, and Abram Smith, defendant, on the part 
of the plaintiff, follows : 



15 



To the first interrogatory, deponent answers and says : I do not know either 
the plaintiff or defendant. 

To the second interrogatory he answers and says : I was personally acquainted 
with Thomas Jefferson before he became President of the United States, the precise 
length of time I do not recollect. The acquaintance did not extend beyond the 
common salutation upon meeting, and accidental conversation upon such meetings. 

To the third interrogatory he answers and says : I was a member of the House 
of Representatives of the United States, during the fifth, sixth, and seventh Congresses, 
from the 3rd of March, 1797, to the third of May, 1803. 

To the fourth interrogatory he answers and says : The electoral votes for 
Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr, for President of the United States, were equal, 
and that the choice of one of them as President did devolve on the House of Repre- 
sentatives. 

To the fifth interrogatory he answers and says : I presume this interrogatory 
points to an occurrence which took place before the choice of President was made, 
and after the balloting had continued for several days, of which I have often publicly 
spoken. My memory enables me to state the transaction, in substance, correctly, but 
not to be answerable for the precise words which were used upon the occasion. 
Messrs. Baer and Craik, members of the House of Representatives from Maryland, 
and General Morris, a member of the House from Vermont, and myself, having the 
power to determine the votes of the States, from similarity of views and opinions 
during the pendency of the election, made an agreement to vote together. We 
foresaw that a crisis was approaching which might probably force us to separate, in 
our votes, from the party with whom we usually acted. We were determined to make 
a President, and the period of Mr. Adam's Admini .tration was rapidly approaching. 

In determining to recede from the opposition to Mr. Jefferson, it occurred to us, 
that probably instead of being obliged to surrender at discretion, we might obtain 
terms of capitulation. The gentlemen whose names I have mentioned, authorized 
me to declare their concurrence with me upon the best terms that could be procured. 
The vote of either of us was sufficient to decide the choice. With a view to the end 
mentioned, I applied to Mr. John Nicholas, a member of the House from Virginia, 
who was a particular friend of Mr. Jefferson. I stated to Mr. Nicholas, that if certain 
points of the future Administration could be understood and arranged with Mr. 
Jefferson, I was authorized to say that three States would withdraw from an opposition 
to his election. He asked me what those points were. I answered, first, sir, the 
support of public credit ; secondly, the maintenance of the naval system ; and, lastly, 
that subordinate public officers employed only in the execution of details, established 
by law, shall not be removed from office on the ground of their political character, 
nor without complaint against their conduct. I explained myself, that I considered 
it not only reasonable, but necessary, that offices of high discretion and confidence 
should be filled by men of Mr. Jefferson's choice. I exemplified by mentioning, on 
the one hand, the offices of the Secretaries of States, Treasury, foreign ministers, &c. ; 
and, on the other, the collectors of ports, &c. Mr. Nicholas answered me, that he 
considered the points as very reasonable, that he was satisfied that they corresponded 



16 



with the views and intentions of Mr. Jefferson, and knew him well. That he was 
acquainted with most of the gentlemen who would probably be about him and enjoying 
his confidence, in case he became President, and that if I would be satisfied with his 
assurance, he could solemnly declare it as his opinion, that Mr. Jefferson, in his 
administration, would not depart from the points I had proposed. I replied to 
Mr. Nicholas, that I had not the least doubt of the sincerity of his declaration, and 
that his opinion was perfectly correct, but that I wanted an engagement, and that if 
the points could in any form be understood as conceded by Mr. Jefferson, the election 
should be ended, and proposed to him to consult Mr. Jefferson. This he declined, 
and said he could do no more than give me the assurance of his own opinion as to 
the sentiments and designs of Mr. Jefferson and his friends. I told him that was not 
sufficient, that we should not surrender without better terms. Upon this we separated, 
and I shortly after met with General Smith, to whom I unfolded myself in the same 
manner that I had done to Mr. Nicholas. In explaining myself to him in relation to 
the nature of the offices alluded to, I mentioned the offices of George Latimer, collector 
of the port of Philadelphia, and Allen McLane, collector of Wilmington. General 
Smith gave me the same assurance as to the observance, by Mr. Jefferson, of the 
points which I had stated, which Mr. Nicholas had done. I told him I should not 
be satisfied, nor agree to yield, till I had the assurance from Mr. Jeff"erson him- 
self; but that if he would consult Mr. Jefferson, and bring the assurance from him, 
the election should be ended. The General made no difficulty in consulting Mr. 
Jefferson, and proposed giving me his answer next morning. The next day, upon 
our meeting. General Smith informed me that he had seen Mr. Jefferson, and stated 
to him the points mentioned, and was authorized by him to say, that they corresponded 
with his views and intentions, and that we might confide in him accordingly. The 
opposition of Vermont, Maryland,, and Delaware, was immediately withdrawn, and 
Mr. Jefferson was made President by the votes of ten States. 

To the sixth interrogatory, the deponent answers and says : I was introduced to 
Mr. Burr the day of Mr. Jefferson's inauguration as President. I had no acquaintance 
with him before, and very little afterwards, till the last winter of his Vice Presidency, 
when I became a member of the Senate of the United States. 

To the seventh interrogatory, deponent answers and says : I do not know, nor 
did I ever believe, from any information I received, that Mr. Burr entered into any 
negotiation or agreement with any member of either party, in relation to the Pres- 
idential election, which depended before the House of Representatives. 

To the eighth interrogatory, the deponent answers and says : Upon the subject 
of this interrogatory, I can express only a loose opinion, founded upon the conjectures 
at the time, of what could be effected by Mr. Burr, by mortgaging the patronage of 
the Executive. I can only say, generally, that I did not believe, at the time, that he 
had the means of making himself President. But this opinion has no other ground than 
conjecture, derived from a knowledge of means which existed, and, if applied, their 
probable operation on individual characters. In answer to the last part of the 
interrogatory, deponent says : I know of nothing of which Mr. Burr was apprised, 
which related to the election. j ^ BAYARD 



17 



District of Columbia, Washington : 

The deposition of the honorable James A. Bayard, consisting of six pages, was 
taken and sworn to before us, this 3d day of April, A. D., 1806. 

STEPHEN R. BRADLEY. 
GEORGE LOGAN. 



DEPOSITION OF SAMUEL SMITH. 
Deposition of the honorable Samuel Smith, Senator of the United States for the State 

of Maryland, a witness produced, sworn and examined in a cause depending 

in the supreme court of the State of New York, between James Gillespie, 

plaintiff, and Abram Smith, defendant, on the part and behalf of the defendant, 

as follows : 

1st. I knew Thomas Jefferson some years previous to 1800. The precise time 
when our acquaintance commenced, I do not recollect. 

2d. and 3d. I was a member of the House of Representatives of the United 
States in 1800 and 1801, and know that Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr had an 
equal number of the votes given by the electors of President and Vice President of 
the United States. 

4th. Presuming that this question may have reference to conversations (for I 
know of no bargains or agreements) which took place at the time of the balloting, I 
will relate those which I well recollect to have had with three gentlemen, separately, 
of the Federal party. On the Wednesday preceding the termination of the election. 
Colonel Josiali Parker asked a conversation with me in private. He said that many 
gentlemen were desirous of putting an end to the election; that they only wanted to 
know what would be the conduct of Mr. Jefferson in case he should be elected 
President, particularly as it related to the public debt, to commerce, and navy. I 
had heard Mr. Jefferson converse on all those subjects lately, and imformed him 
what I understood were the opinions of that gentleman. I lived in the house with 
Mr. Jefferson, and that I might be certain that what I had said was correct, I sought 
and had a conversation that evening with him on those points ; and I presume, 
though I do not precisely recollect, that I communicated to him the conversation 
which I had had with Colonel Parker. 

The next day General Dayton, (a Senator,) after some jesting conversation, 
asked me to converse with him in private. We retired. He said that he, with 
some other gentlemen, wished to have a termination put to the pending election ; but 
he wished to know what were the opinions or conversations of Mr. Jefferson respecting 
the navy, commerce, and public debt. In answer I said that I had last night had 
conversation with Mr. Jefferson on all those subjects. That he had told me that any 
opinion he should give at this time, might be attributed to improper motives. That 
to me he had no hesitation in saying that, as to the public debt, he had been averse 
to the manner of funding it, but that he did not believe there was any man who 
respected his own character, who would or could think of injuring its credit at this 
time. That, on commerce, he thought that a correct idea of his opinion on that 
subject might be derived from his writings, and particularly from his conduct while he 



18 



was Minister at Paris, when he thought he had evinced his attention to the commercial 
interests of his country. That he had not changed opinion, and still did consider the 
prosperity of our commerce as essential to the true intrest of the nation. That, on 
the navy, he had fully expressed his opinion in his Notes on Virginia ; that he 
adhered still to his ideas then given. That he believed our growing commerce 
would call for protection ; that he had been averse to a too rapid increase of our 
navy ; that he believed a navy must naturally grow out of our commerce, but thought 
prudence would advise its increase to progress with the increase of the nation, and 
that in this way he was friendly to the establishment. General Dayton appeared 
pleased with the conversation, and, I think, said that, if this conversation had taken 
place earlier, much trouble might have been saved, or words to that effect. 

At the funeral of Mr. Jones, of Georgia, I walked with Mr. Bayard, of Delaware. 
The approaching election became the subject of conversation. I recollect no part of 
that conversation, except his saying that he thought that an half hour's conversation 
between us might settle the business. That idea was not again repeated. On the 
day after, I had held the conversation with General Dayton, I was asked by Mr. 
Bayard to go into the committee room. He then stated that he had it in his power 
(and was so disposed) to terminate the election, but he wished information as to Mr. 
Jefferson's opinions on certain subjects, and mentioned, (I think,) the same three 
points already alluded to, as asked by Colonel Parker and General Dayton, and 
recived from me the same answer in substance, ( if not in words, ) that I had given 
to General Dayton. He added a fourth, to wit; What would be Mr. Jefferson's 
conduct as to the public officers? He said he did not mean confidential officers, but, 
by the way of elucidating his question, he said, such as Mr. Latimer, of Philadelphia 
and Mr. McLane, of Delaware. I answered that I never had heard Mr. Jefferson say 
anything on that subject. He requested that I would inquire, and inform him the 
next day. / did so. And the next day [Saturday) told him, that Afr. Jefferson 
had said that he did not think that such officers ought to be dismissed on political 
grounds only, except in cases inhere they had made improper use of their offices, to 
force the officers under them to vote contrary to their judgment. That as to Mr. 
McLane, he had already been spoken to in his behalf by Major Eccleston, and from 
the character given him by that gentleman, he considered him a meritorious officer; of 
course, that he would not be displaced, or ought not to be displaced. J further added, 
that Mr. Bayard tnight rest assured, [or words to that effect,) that Mr. Jefferson 
would conduct, as to those points, agreeably to the opiniotis I had stated as his. Mr. 
Bayard then said, tue will give the vote on Monday, and we seprated. Early in the 
election, my colleague, Mr Baer, told me that we should have a President, that they 
would not get up without electing one or the other gentlemen. Mr. Baer had voted 
against Mr. Jefferson untill the final vote, when, I believe, he withdrew, or voted 
blank, but do not perfectly recollect. 

5th. I became acquainted with Colonel Burr some time in the revolutionary war. 

6th. I know of no agreement or bargain in the years 1800 and 1801 with any 
person or persons whatsoever, respecting the office of President in behalf of Aaron 
Burr, nor have I any reason to believe that any such existed. 



19 



7th. I received a letter from Colonel Burr,dated,I believe, i6th December, 1800, 
in reply to one which I had just before written him. The letter of Colonel Burr is 
as follows : 

" It is highly improbable that I shall have an equal number of votes with Mr. 
Jefferson ; but if such should be the result, every man who knows rae ought to know, 
that I would utterly disclaim all competition. Be assured that the Federal party can 
entertain no wish for such an exchange. As to my friends, they would dishonor my 
views and insult my feelings, by a suspicion that I would submit to be instrumental 
in counteracting the wishes and the expectations of the people of the United States. 
And I now constitute you my proxy to declare these sentiments, if the occasion 
shall require." 

I have not now that letter by me, nor any other letter from him, to refer to — 
the preceding is taken from a printed copy, which corresponds with my recollection, 
and which I believe to be correct. My correspondence with him continued till the 
close of the election. In none of his letters to me, or to any other person that I saw, 
was there any thing that contradicted the sentiments contained in that letter. 

S. SMITH. 

City of JVashington, in the Disti-ict of Coluvibia: 

The deposition of the honorable Samuel Smith, written upon five pages, was 
duly taken and sworn to before us, two of the commissioners named in the annexed 
commission, at the Capitol, in said city of Washington, on the fifteenth day of April, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and six, and of the Independence 
of the United States, the thirtieth. GEORGE LOGAN, 

DAVID STONE. 

This testimony needs no comment. 

Mr. Jefferson vouches Mr. Smith on the 15th of April, 
1806, as his witness to sustain the charge oi false stateme^its 
made by my father. The deposition of General Smith, made 
under oath on the same day, corroborates, substantially and fully, 
the statement made by my father in his deposition. 

It stated in the passage from Mr. Jefferson's works which 
I have last quoted, that the deposition was taken in the suit of 
Burr vs. Cheetham, and seemed to have no relation to the suit, 
nor to any other object than to calumniate him, [Mr. Jefferson.] 
The former part of this statement as to the title of the suit, is 
evidently an error, and as to the latter, I have neither knowledge 
nor the means of knowledge of the relevancy of the testimony 
to the suit of Gillespie vs. Smith. I have been able, after 
diligent inquiry, to ascertain nothing in relation to it, nor was 



20 



there among my father's papers any paper or memorandum 
having reference to the subject. The material question, how- 
ever, as regards my father is, that his answer is responsive to 
the interrogatory, and I have yet to learn that a witness has 
the right to determine the relevancy or irrelevancy of the 
matters to which he deposes to the subject in controversy in 
the case. 

Sir, when my brother and I first read this charge we were 
at loss for the means of refutation. We could not find, amongst 
my father's papers, any trace of his having made such a deposi- 
tion, and a copy of his deposition in Burr vs. Cheetham, which 
we did find, (in which case Mr. Jefferson alleged the false 
deposition to have been made,) contained nothing of the kind. 

In this state of ignorance, after many fruitless attempts 
at obtaining information, the documents I have just read were 
fortunately — or should I not rather say providentially.' — dis- 
covered. 

I went to New York, and, under the supposition that, 
having been a chief actor in the transaction, according to Mr. 
Jefferson's statement. Colonel Burr, who was then living, could 
give me some information, I called upon him. His memory 
of those times, and indeed generally, seemed to be much 
impaired, and it was only after many minute and direct inquiries 
that he at last told me he thought Bradley, of Vermont, had 
been a commissioner to take depositions in a suit relating to 
the events of the election of 1801. He had no further recol- 
lection of the matter. 

I wrote to the representatives of Mr. Bradley, and the 
<?n^z«rt'/ depositions, of which I have read copies, were returned 
to me by his son or representative ; having been retained 
amongst Mr. Bradley's papers, and thus preserved. 

May I not, Mr. President, without aggression, be permitted 
to remark, that, rest where it may, the charge of calumny rests 
not upon my father's memory. 



21 



The deposition of Mr. Bayard was made during the life- 
time of all the parties connected with, or having a knowledge of, 
the matters detailed in it, and made, too, before commissioners 
(Messrs. Bradley and Logan) opposed to him in political prin- 
ciples, and members of Mr. Jefferson's party. 

The memoranda of Mr. Jefferson were secluded amongst 
his private papers , revised by him in 1823, eight years after 
Mr. Bayard's death, and left posthumous publication to tarnish 
his reputation when the means of refutation might have been 
lost. Those means, however, have been preserved, and the 
object and intent of these "Anas," so far as relates to 
Mr. Bayard, utterly defeated — with what benefit to the reputation 
of Mr. Jefferson, is left to others to determine. 

Sir, I freely admit, that Mr. Jefferson was a man of genius, 
and rendered great services to his country ; and my object is not 
aggression. I have endeavored to make this statement merely 
defensive ; nor have I wandered from the charges affecting the 
character of my father, for the purpose of commenting upon 
the opinions of Mr. Jefferson, or investigating the numerous 
charges contained in his "Memoirs" against the Federal party, 
its leading members, and the State in which it maintained a 
majority during his administration. These, together with the 
general views of Mr. Jefferson on religion and Government, and 
his character as a philosopher, statesman, or man, will be more 
impartially considered at a later day ; more fairly weighed, and 
truly estimated, when those whose feelings are, in any way, 
connected with the contest in which he was so prominent, are 
not to be the arbiters. His most devoted friends, however, 
cannot but regret that the enlightened judgement and benevolent 
feelings, which, in his letter to Mr. Adams, of June 23, 181 3, 
dictated the sentiment, that he "should see with reluctance the 
passions of that day rekindled in this, while so many of the 
actors are living, and all are too near the scene not to participate 
in sympathies with them," did not look beyond the duration 
of his own life, and restrain the publication of much that is 

22 



contained in the "Memoirs," which, whether with reference 
to his own fame, or with a proper regard for the opinions, 
sentiments, and characters of others, a wise discretion alone 
would certainly have prevented. 

Mr. President, I have concluded my defense ; but I trust 
I shall not be considered as trespassing too far upon the time 
and patience of the Senate, by the statement of a few facts — 
probably little known to the public — having relation to my 
father's course during the contest of 1801, and illustrative of 
his principles and character — a character which won the con- 
fidence of his political opponents, whilst it retained that of his 
friends. 

On the 17th of February, 1801, the day on which the 
election was terminated in favor of Mr. Jefferson, mainly through 
the influence and exertions of Mr. Bayard, he was nominated 
by President Adams as Minister to the French Republic. 

He was then thirty-three years of age. That nomination 
was unanimously confirmed by the Senate on the 19th of 
February ; and, on the same day, Mr. Bayard addressed the 
following letter to the President, resigning the office : 

Washington, February 19, 1801. 

Sir : I beg you to accept my thanks for the honor conferred on me, by the 
nomination as Minister to the French Republic. Under most circumstances, I should 
have been extremly gratified with such an opportunity of rendering myself serviceable 
to the country. But the delicate situation in which the late presidential election has 
placed me, forbids my exposing myself to the suspicion of having adopted, from impure 
motives, the line of conduct which I pursued. Representing the smallest State in the 
Union, without resources which could furnish the means of self-protection, I was 
compelled, by the obligation of a sacred duty, so to act, as not to hazard the constitution 
upon which the political existence of the State depends. 

The service which I should have to render, by accepting the appointment, would 
be under the administration of Mr. Jefferson, and having been in the number of those 
who withdrew themselves from the opposition to his election, it is impossible for me 
to take an office, the tenure of which would be at his pleasure. 

You will, therefore, pardon me, sir, for begging you to accept my resignation of 
the appointment. 

I have the honor to be, with perfect consideration, your very obedient servant, 

JAMES A. BAYARD. 

The President of (he United States. 



23 



The following extract is from a letter written three days 
afterwards to a near relative, one of the earliest and most 
intimate friends of Mr. Bayard. Those who knew him per- 
sonally, will recognize his character in its sentiments. It con- 
tains the principles which governed his political course and 
ambition, then, and through the rest of his life. Principles 
which induced him to accept the mission to Ghent as a duty 
to his country, and when peace was concluded, to decline that 

to St Peter sburgh. 

Washington, February 22, 1801. 

You are right in your conjecture as to the office offered me. I have since been 
nominated Minister to France, concurred in nevi. con. — commissioned and resigned. 
Under proper circumstances, the acceptance would have been complete gratification ; 
but, under the existing, I thought the resignation most honorable. To have taken 
;^ 1 8,000 out of the public Treasury, with a knowledge that no service could be rendered 
by me, as the French Government would have waited for a man who represtnted the 
existing feelings and views of this Government, would have been disgraceful. 

Another consideration of great weight, aiose from the part I took in the pres- 
idential election. As I had given the turn to the election, it was impossible for me 
to accept an office, which would be held on the tenure of Mr. Jefferson's pleasure. 
My ambition shall never be gratified at the expense of a suspicion. 

I shall never lose sight of the motto of the great original of our name. 

Sir, it must often happen that the extent of the services 
rendered by a statesman to his country, will remain unknown 
and unestimated, and such I believe has been peculiarly my 
father's fate, both in relation to the election of 1801, and the 
treaty of peace concluded at Ghent in 18 14. 

Such, certainly, was his own belief, when, on his death 
bed, he expressed his calm but mournful regret to the distin- 
guished surgeon who attended him, during the short week 
which he survived after reaching his home : "Ah ! doctor, my 
country will never know how much she owes me." 



[ADDENDA. 

Frederick, Api-j/ 19, 1830. 

Sir : In compliance with your request, I now communicate to you my recollections 

of the events of the presidential election, by the House of Representatives, in iSoi. 

There has been no period of our political history more misunderstood and more 

grossly misrepresented. The course adopted by the Federal party was one of prin- 



24 



ciple and not of faction, and I think the present a suitable occasion for explaining the 
views and motives at least of those gentleman who, having it in their power to decide 
the election at any morrient, were induced to protract it for a time, but ultimately to 
withdraw their opposition to Mr. Jefferson. 

I have no hesitation in saying that the facts stated in the deposition of your father, 
the late James A. Bayard, so far as they came to my knowledge, are substantially 
correct ; and although nearly thirty years have elapsed since that eventful period, my 
recollection is vivid as to the principal circumstances, which, from the part I was 
called upon to act, were deeply graven on my memory. As soon as it was generally 
known that the two Democratic candidates, Jefferson and Burr, had the highest and 
an equal number of votes, and that the election would consequently devolve on the 
House of Representatives, Mr. Dent, who had hitherto acted with the Federal party, 
declared his intention to vote for Mr. Jefferson, in consequence of which determination 
the vote of Maryland was divided. 

It was soon ascertained that there were six~ individuals, the vote of any one of 
whom could at any moment decide the election. These were your father, the late 
James A. Bayard, who held the vote of the State of Delaware, General Morris, of 
Vermont, who held the divided vote of that State, and Mr. Craik, Mr. Thomas, 
Mr. Dennis, and myself, who held the divided vote of Maryland. Much anxiety was 
shown by the friends of Mr. Jefferson, and much ingenuity used to discover the line 
of conduct which would be pursued by thera. Deeply impressed with the responsi- 
bility which attached to their peculiar situation, and conscious that the American 
people looked to them for a President, they could not rashly determine either to 
surrender their constitutional discretion, or to disappoint the expectations of their 
fellow-citizens. 

Your father, Mr. Craik, and myself, having compared ideas upon the subject, 
and finding that we entertained the same views and opinions, resolved to act together, 
and accordingly entered into a solemn and mutual pledge, that we would, in the first 
instance, yield to the wishes of the great majority of the party with whom we acted, 
and vote for Mr. Burr, but that no consideration should induce us to protract the 
contest beyond a reasonable period for the purpose of ascertaining whether he could 
be elected. We determined that a President should be chosen, but were willing thus 
far to defer to the opinions of our political friends, whose preference of Mr. Burr was 
founded upon a belief that he was less hostile to Federal men and Federal measures 
than Mr. Jefferson. General Morris and Mr. Dennis concurred in this arrangement. 
The views by which the Federal party were governed were these : They held 
that the Constitution had vested in the House of Representatives a high discretion, 
in a case like the present, to be exercised for the benefit of the nation ; and that, in 
the execution of this delegated power, an honest and unbiased judgment was the 
measure of their responsibility. They were less certain of the hostility of Mr. Burr 
to Federal policy than that of Mr. JefTerson, which was known and decided. Mr. 
JefTerson had identified himself with, and was at the head of, the party in Congress 
who had opposed every measure deemed necessary by the Federalists for putting the 
country in a posture of defense ; such as fortifying the harbors and sea-ports, estab- 
lishing manufactories of arms ; erecting arsenals, and filling them with arms and 

25 



ammunition ; erecting a navy for the defense of commerce, &c. His speculative 
opinions were known to be hostile to the independence of the judiciary, to the finan- 
cial system of the country, and to internal improvements. 

All these matters the Federalists believed to be intimately blended with the 
prosperity of the nation, and they deprecated, therefore, the elevation of a man to 
the head of the Government whose hostility to them was open and avowed. It was 
feared, too, from his prejudices against the party which supported them, that he 
would dismiss all public officers who differed with him in sentiment, without regard to 
their qualifications and honesty, but on the ground only of political character. The 
House of Representatives adopted certain resolutions for their government during the 
election, one of which was, that there should be no adjournment till it was decided. 

On the nth February, 1801, being the day appointed by law for counting the 
votes of the electoral colleges, the House of Representatives proceeded, in a body, 
to the Senate Chamber, where the Vice President,in view of both Houses of Congress, 
opened the certificates of the electors of the different States, and as the votes were 
read, the tellers on the part of each House counted, and took lists of them, which 
being compared and delivered to him, he announced to both Houses the state of 
the votes : which was — for Thomas Jefferson, 73 votes ; for Aaron Burr, 73 votes ; 
for John Adams, 65 votes ; for Charles Pinckney, 64 votes ; for John Jay, i vote ; and 
then declared, that the greatest number, and majority of votes, being equal, the 
choice had devolved on the House of Representatives. The members of the House 
then withdrew to their own Chamber, and proceeded to ballot for a President. On 
the first ballot, it was found that Thomas Jefferson had the votes of eight States, 
Aaron Burr of six States, and that two were divided. As there were sixteen States, 
and a majority was necessary to determine the election, Mr. Jefferson wanted the 
vote of one State. Thus the result which had been anticipated was realized. 

The balloting continued throughout that day, and the following night, at short 
intervals, with the same result, the twenty-sixth ballot being taken at eight o'clock 
on the morning of the 12th of February. The balloting continued with the same 
result, from day to day, till the 17th of February, without any adjournment of the 
House. On the previous day (February 16) a consultation was held by the gentle- 
men I have mentioned, when, being satisfied that Mr. Burr could not be elected, as 
no change had taken place in his favor, and there was no evidence of any effort on 
the part of himself or his personal friends to procure his election, it was resolved to 
abandon the contest. This determination was made known to the Federal members 
generally, and excited some discontent among the violent of the party, who thought 
it better to go without a President than to elect Mr. Jefferson. A general meeting, 
however, of the Federal members was called, and the subject explained, when it was 
admitted that Mr. Burr could not be elected. A few individuals persisted in their 
resolution not to vote for Mr. Jefferson, but the great majority wished the election 
terminated and a President chosen. Having also received assurances from a sourc^ 
on which we placed reliance, that our tvishes ivith respect to certain points of Federal 
policy in which wc felt a deep interest would be observed in case Mr. Jefferson was elected, 
the opposition of Vermont, Delaware, and Maryland, was withdrawn, and on the 
thirty-sixth ballot, your father, the late James A. Bayard, put in a blank ballot, my- 



26 



self and my colleagues did the same, and General Morris absented himself. The 
South Carolina Federalists also put in blank ballots. Thus terminated that memorable 
contest. 

Previous to, and pending, the election, rumors were industriously circulated 
and letters written to different parts of the country, charging the Federalists with the 
design to prevent the election of a President, and to usurp the Government by an act 
of legislative power. Great anxiety and apprehension were created in the minds of 
all, and of none more than the Federalists generally, who were not apprised of the 
determination of those gentlemen who held the power, and were resolved to terminate 
the contest when the proper period arrived. But neither these rumors, nor the excite- 
ment produced by them, nor the threats made by their opponents to resist, by force, 
such a measure, had the least influence on the conduct of those gentlemen. They 
knew the power which they possessed, and were conscious of the uprightness of their 
views, and of the safety and constitutional character of the course they had adopted. 
I was privy to all the arrangements made, and attended all the meetings of the 
Federal party when consulting on the course to be pursued in relation to the election, 
and I pledge my most solemn asseveration that no such measure was ever, for a 
moment, contemplated by that party ; that no such proposition was ever made ; and 
that, if it had been, it would not only have been discouraged, but instantly put 
down by those gentlemen who possessed the power, and were pledged to each other 
to elect a President before the close of the session. 

I am, respectfully, sir, your most obedient servant, 

GEORGE BAER. 
Richard H. Bayard, Esq. 



Leiperville, 4th ofjth month, 1830. 
Esteemed Friend: I have carefully considered the contents of thy letter of 
the i6th ultimo, and can fully appreciate the object in view, which appears to be the 
vindication of the character of thy father, James A. Bayard, in consequence of 
certain "injurious imputations" affecting it, contained in the writings of Jefferson, 
lately published, in reference to his conduct in the presidential election of 1 801. I 
must be excused from attempting anything like a circumstantial account of the transac- 
tions of so remote a period. The depositions shown me by thee, which were made by 
thy father in 1805, and the statement recently drawn up by George Baer, (my 
colleague in Congress, ) of the occurences which then happened, I believe to be sub- 
stantially correct — and I may add that, as a Federal member of the House of Repre- 
sentatives, I attended the meetings of the Federalists, held for consultation at that 
deeply interesting crisis — and know of no cause to doubt the sincerity of the professed 
object of the party, which was to execute the important duty devolved upon them, by 
exercising a constitutional discretion for the benefit of the nation, according to the 
dictates of their best judgment at the time. Of any project or determination in- 
consistent with these views I am utterly ignorant, as I am of any fact or circumstance 
which ought, in the slightest degree, to lessen the high respect which, in common 
with the American people, I have uniformly entertained for the integrity of thy 



27 



father, as well as for his preeminent talents, zealously devoted to the service of his 
country. 

D „ T. JNO. CHEW THOMAS 

Richard H. Bayard. ^'■^^j. 



I, William Jarvis, of Weathersfield, in the county of Windsor,and State of Vermont, 
do testify and declare that, in the friendly intercourse which took place between the 
late honorable Lewis R. Morris, and myself,among various other topics, politics often 
became the subject of conversation. In one of these conversations, the contest which 
took place in the House of Representatives in the year 1801, for the election of Mr. 
Jefferson or Mr. Burr, to be President of the United States, was adverted to ; when 
General Morris remarked that several Federalists of high standing wished for the 
election of Mr. Jefferson in preference to Mr. Burr, naming the late honorable 
James A. Bayard, of Delaware, as being one ; and stated that Mr. Bayard came to 
him (General Morris) and urged him to vote in favor of Mr. Jefferson, or to absent him- 
self when the ballots of the State delegations were taken. Mr. Bayard remarking 
to him, that as he (Mr. Bayard) represented a Federal State, he could not, with 
propriety, vote for Mr. Jefferson, but as the State of Vermont was friendly to the 
election of Mr. Jefferson, no objection of the kind precluded him (General Morris) 
from giving his vote to Mr. Jefferson, or from absenting himself from the poll. As 
the delegation of Vermont in Congress consisted of two members, one of which had 
voted for Mr. Jefferson, and he (General Morris) had voted for Mr. Burr, the vote 
of the State had previously been lost ; but upon the representations of Mr. Bayard, 
with whom General Morris said he was on terms of the most friendly intimacy, and 
for whose talents he entertained the highest respect, and had the most entire confidence 
in his honor and integrity, he was induced, prior to the last ballot, to absent himself 
from the House, and the other member being in favor of Mr. Jefferson, the vote of 
Vermont was accordingly given to him. After a lapse of ten or twelve years I do 
not pretend to recollect the precise language of General Morris, but I am satisfied 
that the preceding declaration contains the true and faithful sense of his communication 
to me relative to that question. 

WILLIAM JARVIS. 
Weathersfield, 29M Aj>n7, 1830. 



Council Chamber, Boston, /^mc 2, 1830. 

Sir : I enclose you the statement of my brother, William Jarvis, of Vermont, 
and it gives him and myself great pleasure to be in any way instrumental in vindi- 
cating the character of your father. 

One such witness as Mr. Jarvis is sufficient. He was appointed consul at Libson 

by Mr. Jefferson, and was there as consul and charge d'affaires many years. Was 

also appointed by Mr. Madison commissary general of the Northern Army, which he 

declined ; was one of the presidential electors of the State of Vermont at the last 

election, and has repeatedly declined the Gubernatorial chair of that State. With 

great respect, your obedient servant, 

„ „ ^ ^ JOSEPH E. SPRAGUE. 

Richard H. Bayard, Esq. 



28 



POLITICAL HISTORY. 

Letter from Judge Paine, of Vermont, to the Editor of A^ile'' s Register. 

WiLLIAMSTOWN, ( VERMONT, ) //Wt' 1,1830. 

Dear Sir : Noticing, in the papers of the day, the memorandum made by the 
late President Jefferson, of the communication of Mr. Livingston, of Louisiana, in 
relation to a conversation said to be held by the late Mr. Bayard, of Delaware, with 
General Smith, of Maryland, pending the presidential election in the House of 
Representatives in iSoi, I determined immediately to communicate to you my know- 
ledge of the views and sentiments of Mr. Bayard, in relation to that election. But, 
from a reluctance to appear in the public prints at my time of life, I changed my 
determination. However, by the advice of friends, on whose judgment I rely, I 
now concisely communicate to you my knowledge on that subject. 

And first, permit me to say, that probably I possess more knowledge on the 
subject, as it relates to Mr. Bayard, than any person now living. Mr. Bayard, as 
is well known, was, at the time, the sole Representative from Delaware, and could 
cast the vote of that State as he thought proper. The late General Morris and 
Matthew Lyon were the Representatives from this State — Vermont ; for, at that 
time, Vermont had but two Representatives. General Morris voted for Mr. Burr, 
and Mr. Lyon for Mr. Jefferson. In consequence the vote of Vermont was lost. 
At the same time I was in the Senate, and was on intimate and confidential terms 
with General Morris, and had been so for many years. He held conversations with 
me every day during the ballotings in the House of Representatives, in relation to 
the business before them. 

General Morris was very intimate with Mr. Bayard ; and, in consequence of 
this intimacy, I became very well acquainted with the latter gentleman. And I 
do know that Mr. Bayard was much dissatisfied that the balloting should have been 
so long protracted, and that, the day before the last ballot, he declared, among his 
political friends, it should be brought to a close the next day. He thought that the 
delay would cause a dangerous excitement in the country. 

The evening before the last ballot was taken. General Morris informed me that 
he should not be in the House the next day, and, in consequence, Mr. Jefferson 
would be elected. He said he was induced to secede by the representations and at 
the request of Mr. Bayard, who thought that he — General Morris — could secede 
with greater propriety than a person who was the only Representative of a Federal 
State, and Vermont, at the time, was nearly equally divided on the subject ; so that 
I always considered Mr. Bayard as the means of Mr. Jefferson's election, and I 
believe he was so considered by many others. 

That Mr. Bayard might have sportively said to General Smith what is attributed 
to him, is possible ; and, if so. General Smith would not probably remember it. But 
if such conversation was held with corrupt views, for the purpose of influencing him, 
it is impossible he should have forgotten it. I have no belief that Mr. Bayard would 
seriously have made what amounts to a proposition to corrupt another. 

I am, with great regard, your obedient servant, 

ELIJAH PAINE.] 



29 



Mr. PEARCE. Mr. President, the Joint Committee on 
the Library, of which I am a member, were directed by an act 
of Congress to cause the Jefferson papers to be published 
These papers, sir, were very voluminous. They consist of one 
hundred and thirty-four large bound volumes of manuscript, be- 
sides an immense mass of loose papers. It was manifestly im- 
possible for the Committee on the Library, individually, to per- 
form the duties of editor. They therefore employed a gentle- 
man of talent and character, and directed him, generally, to 
make such a selection from the papers of Mr. Jefferson, as were 
necessary and proper to exhibit fairly and fully his opinions, 
character, and public course. 

I regret very much that, during the course of that publication, 
the attention of the committee was not called to the items in 
the "Ana," to which the Senator from Delaware has referred. 
Certainly, sir, if that had been the case, I should have deemed 
it my duty, and, I presume, the committee would have deemed 
it theirs, to direct the editor, either to omit the charges referred 
to, or, what would perhaps have been better, to accompany 
them with the refutation which had been given to the public. 
I well recollect the exposition made in the Senate of the United 
States, to which the Senator has referred, and I have read more 
than once the pamphlet issued by the Senator and his brother. 
I consider the accusation of Mr. Jefferson as being as fully 
refuted as it was possible for any accusation to be refuted by 
human testimony. Without the authority of his name, it would 
have rapidly sunk into oblivion. With the authority of his 
name, it has utterly failed to impair the reputation of one who 
was eminent as a statesman and citizen, and distinguished, not 
only for ability, but for enlightened and earnest patriotism, 
and for a public and private honor which was without a stain. 
That character Mr. Bayard maintained, not only in his own 
State, where such a reputation as I have described was always 
accorded to him, but throughout the Union. The tribute due 
to exalted character was not only paid to him by his own political 

30 



party, but in the cordial acknowledgements of those to whom 
he was politically opposed. His ability and patriotism could 
not have been more highly indorsed than they were by the 
chief of his political opponents, Mr. Madison, who appointed 
him one of the commissioners to Ghent, to negotiate peace with 
Great Britain. 

I have only to repeat, sir, my regret, that I was not informed, 
during the progress of this publication, that these accusations 
were about to be included in the congressional edition of 
Mr. Jefferson's papers. 

Mr. CASS. Mr. President, I have listened, with great 
interest, to the vindication which we have heard from the honor- 
able Senator from Delaware, and I am sure that, if Mr. Jefferson 
were now here to hear the statements made by that honorable 
Senator, he would be the first to say that the memory of the 
distinguished statesman who has been alluded to, had been 
unjustly reflected on. Mr. Jefferson's high character, his truth, 
and his frankness, would have led him, as soon as any other 
man, to disavow any erroneous reflections. The reports, on 
which the Senator from Delaware has commented, undoubtedly 
originated in that period of excitement which attended the 
presidential election of 1801. I bear the circumstances in per- 
fect recollection ; and, sir, perhaps never, in the whole history 
of our country, from the 4th of July, 1776, to the moment when 
I am addressing the Senate, were the American people more 
excited than at that time. Independent of the radical difference 
in the character of the two men who were presented to them, 
well known and well appreciated, there was a great principle 
involved in that controversy — the principle of the distinct 
enunciation of the determination of the American people that 
Thomas Jefferson should be their President. Now, sir, when 
the event has passed by, with all its feelings and passions, his- 
tory has ratified and commended the action of the House of 
Representatives. There is not a man at this day who, in 



31 



looking back to the history of that period, and the subsequent 
events, will pretend to say that Colonel Burr should have been 
chosen President, and Mr. Jefferson set aside. No man, know- 
ing the character of Colonel Burr, as evinced in his conflict 
with General Hamilton, can tell what would have been the 
consequences of such an event. Mr. President, you cannot 
look at the publications of European statesmen — and they are 
coming to us every day, in the most authentic form, in the 
papers left behind them — without finding similar errors into 
which they have been led. Mr. Jefferson was led into this 
error in the same way as they were into similar ones in regard 
to their countries. I repeat, however, the vindication of the 
Senator from Delaware to-day is complete and satisfactory ; 
and, if Mr. Jefferson were here, he would be the first to say so. 

Mr. President, I add my full concurrence to what has been 
said by the honorable Senator from Maryland. I had the 
honor, when a youth, to see Mr. Bayard often. I lived , for a 
while, in his own town. The impression which I derived then, 
and it was the universal sentiment of the country, was, that he 
was a man of the highest honor and probity, of great talents, in- 
tegrity, and intelligence, and of the purest patriotism. I consider 
that one of the most glorious acts of his life when, in opposition 
to the feelings of his own party, he brought over the State of 
Delaware to the support of Mr. Jefferson. If a different result 
had followed that controversy, this Union would have been 
shaken to its very center. I do not recollect that my honorable 
friend from Delaware alJuded to the man who now dwells on 
my memory, Lewis Morris, of Vermont, who, according to the 
best of my recollection, had a principal share in the arrangement 
on the part of that State. I am not sure that he voted at all ; 
but if he did it was for Mr. Jefferson. This, it will be 
recollected, was the action of distinguished Federalists, in 
opposition to the sentiments of a great portion of their own 
party. 



32 



Mr. President, there is a beautiful passage in the life of 
Mr. Bayard — a lesson for every American. He belonged to, 
I may almost say he was the head of, that great party which, 
from the foundation of the Government, has contended with 
the Democratic party for the administration of the affairs of 
this country. He was among the most prominent and honored 
men of that party which opposed the war of 1812, no doubt 
from very conscientious motives. But, sir, in the darkest 
crisis of the war, when it was thought best by Mr. Madison 
to send an embassy to England, who was selected ? This very 
man, against whom these imputations were circulated and sent 
to the ears of Mr. Jefferson. Mr. Jefferson's friend and suc- 
cessor, and confidential adviser, Mr. Madison, selected him to 
accompany Henry Clay, Albert Gallatin, and the other eminent 
men who negotiated the treaty of peace. That was the stamp 
of his contemporaries on his character. He went there in the 
view of the whole world, and, to my knowledge, he had an 
honorable share in the preparation of the articles of peace. 
Those commissioners conducted themselves like Americans. 
They would not give up one inch of territory. When England 
proposed to run a line south of Sandusky bay, taking off a 
part of the State of Ohio, and all north of it to the Mississippi 
river under the pretense that they wanted that territory for 
Indian country, what did the commissioners say .-• That they 
had not power to yield one foot of the territory of the United 
States, and that one inch of it they never would yield. That 
ought to be a lesson to Americans in all time to come. Sir, 
the memory of such men is the treasure of our country. Let 
us protect it with sacred vigilance. 

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. President, the Senator from Del- 
aware has discharged a pious duty, and discharged it well. 
He has rescued the memory of his father from an imputation 
which might have tarnished it, and shown that he was guiltless 
of any such offense. His, sir, was such an offering as filial 



33 



affection might be glad to render to the dead. It was not 
only his right, but his duty, to have risen, and to have done 
what he has this day done. 

But, sir, while he feels it to be his duty to take care of 
the reputation of his father, I may be allowed, perhaps, to say 
a word in reference to a great name, which is deservedly 
cherished in my own State. That Mr. Jefferson believed what 
he recorded, I think no man can doubt who has ever studied 
his character or his history. That he was led into an error, 
and very naturally led into an error, under the excitement and 
the passions of the day, I think has been very clearly shown. 
But, sir, that he is chargeable with culpability for preserving 
and for presenting to posterity such memorials as those which 
he has left behind him, I think, cannot be justly maintained, 
when we come to consider the importance and the value of such 
historical documents. That they should contain errors is 
natural and probable enough ; and that no man would have 
regretted those errors more than Mr. Jefferson, if he had been 
aware of them, I believe I may say, and expect to be sustained 
by the evidence of his life and his career. 

Sir, to say that it is wrong for such a man as Mr. Jefferson, 
who figured in scenes so important, to leave behind him any 
memoirs of a personal character, or a daily record of the pro- 
ceedings of the times, would be to say that we should have 
denied to the world such memoirs as those of Sully, and Claren- 
don, and De Retz, and Burnett, and many others to whichl could 
allude, and which we would not willingly lose. Sir, of all sorts 
of historical documents, these are among the most important. 
I may say, also, that this kind of history is especially liable to 
error, and to errors which are not easily avoided. That such 
mistakes are to be found in Mr. Jefferson's writings, I admit. 
That the Senator from Delaware has proved that he was mistaken 
and deeply erred in this case, I admit ; but whilst I say so, I must 
be allowed to declare that I do not believe Thomas Jefferson 



34 



ever recorded that which he did not believe to be true, either 
in reference to the character of a fellow-man, or in regard to 
any event of historical importance. I must, also, be allowed 
to say that, although writings of this character may be liable 
to such errors, yet it does not follow that it was improper in a 
man who saw what he saw, and who bore such a part in the 
public affairs of the world as he did, to leave such records as 
must be among the most valuable monuments of human history; 
for the good more than compensates for the evil which may be 
thus done. Sir, they will be recurred to hereafter by posterity, 
and they will be received as one of the legacies from him for 
which he will be honored and remembered. 

Mr. MASON. Mr. President, I listened, as did all the 
Senate, with deep interest and emotion to the explanation 
which fell from the very able Senator from Delaware, in vindi- 
cation of the memory of his father. I must be permitted to 
say, sir, even in his presence, that, while it illustrated the 
filial virtues of his own heart, it betrayed an able and well- 
balanced intellect. I can appreciate the painful necessity 
under which he was placed while discharging this duty, achieved, 
I will add , with such signal success in our presence. It would 
be gratuitous in me to say that the evidence, which he has 
been enabled to adduce from the mouldy records of time, has 
been conclusive. 

Sir , it is unfortunate that there was such a necessity. I 
agree with my friend and colleague, and with the honorable 
Senator from Michigan, that, if we could recall the actors of 
those days, the distinguished statesman who recorded those 
pages would have been the first to obliterate them. The feel- 
ings which he carried to his grave in his latter days are strik- 
ingly depicted in the letter which was read by the Senator 
from Delaware, one of his last letters to Mr. Adams, who 
preceded him in office. The passions of the day had then 
subsided, and the excitement of feeling had subsided with them. 



35 



But now, sir, so far as history is concerned, we know how 
utterly impossible it is, with the clearest and least impassioned 
mind, clearly to ascertain the truth when there is excitement 
and prejudice »mingled with it. Mr. Jefferson, undertook, 
unfortunately, as I think, to record conversations at some time 
after they had passed, and he undertook it when the passions 
of the day had not yet subsided, and when none, from the 
necessity of his position, had mingled more freely in them than 
he had done; and all can understand, who know anything of 
the difficulty of getting at truth, how natural it was that even 
such a man should have misinterpreted and misapprehended. 

Sir, Thomas Jefferson has left his impression upon the 
age in which he lived, not only in this broad land, but at home, 
in his native State. No man did more to mould, to cast into 
shape, and form the Government which now prevails in this 
country — a Republican Government, resting upon popular 
institutions. The traces of his mighty intellect are everywhere 
in the history of the country. At home, after he had retired 
from public life, he gave his whole time, and all his thoughts 
to the institutions of his native State, and to the promotion of 
her welfare. 

Sir, the James A. Bayard of that day has passed into 
history, and it may be said of him, that he bore with a 
winning grace that high and lofty name, which the Bayard of 
Dauphiny, had signalized in the fifteenth century — the chevalier 
who, with the virtue of Scipio blended the graces of Alcibiades, 
who lived without fear, and died without reproach. 

Now, sir, one word as to what has fallen from the 
Senator from Maryland, in reference to the publication of the 
papers of Mr. Jefferson. It was at my instance, I think, chiefly, 
that the very learned and able gentleman who was appointed 
by the committee to edit this publication, was selected ; a 
citizen of Virginia, then and still a professor in old William 
and Mary — our renowned and earliest seat of learning — Pro- 



36 



fessor Washington. He conversed with me frequently and 
freely while he had this work under his charge ; he conversed 
equally, I believe, freely with the honorable Senator from 
Maryland, who was then , as now , chairman of the Committee on 
the Library, to whom the duty of publication was intrusted. 
Professor Washington considered it his duty, and in that, I 
believe, he was sustained by the honorable Senator from Mary- 
land — certainly he was by me — to publish everything which 
would contribute materials for future history, or which would 
show the political opinions and tenets of Mr. Jefferson. I pre- 
sume there was no consultation with anybody as to the publi- 
cation of the anas. I never heard of it. My impression is, 
however, that these anas had been published in the private col- 
lection that was printed by Mr. Jefferson's representatives 
after his death, and had gone to the world in that form, and if 
the inquiry had been made of me, or of the honorable Senator 
from Delaware, now before me, [Mr. Bayard,] upon the pro- 
priety of a reprint of this book, it would have been a question 
of difficult solution ; because, if they had been withheld, at a 
future day it might have been supposed that they were sup- 
pressed from tenderness to the memory of the gentleman who 
was assailed. A most unjust and unfounded inference might 
thus have arisen, had they been suppressed. I take it for 
granted, and if I am wrong the Senator from Maryland [Mr. 
Pearce] will correct me, that the attention, neither of the 
committee or of any other, was called by Professor Washington 
to the propriety of publishing the anas, with the other papers. 
I therefore am not in possession of his reasons for having in- 
cluded them ; but I can very well understand, knowing that 
gentleman, as I do, to be a man not only of correct taste, but 
of sound and judicious head, that if the question occurred to 
him as to the propriety of a reprint, he would have solved it 
by saying, "If it is withheld , the act may be deemed equi- 
vocal , and unfounded inferences may be drawn," 



37 



Mr. President , let none fear that what is recorded in those 
anas, after the refutation we have received to-day , will leave 
the slightest shade upon the memory of Bayard with posterity 
or in history ; and equally let none fear , who is interested for 
the memory of Mr. Jefferson, that it will leave upon the public 
mind , or upon the unwritten future , any other impression than 
regret , that so great a man should have left the world before he 
was disabused of this grave misconception, and had, himself, 
an opportunity to disclaim it. 



38 



JL m 1907 



rSEORGE A. WOLF. WILMINGTON. OIL.- 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



01 1 768 877 A 



A^-^ 




- f 



,:v.. j 













